Session 5-10 Transcript
(OEWG 2021-25)

Distinguished Delegates, the 10th meeting of the 5th Substantive Session of the Open-Ended Working Group on Security of and in the Use of ICT is called to order. This morning we began consideration of Agenda Item 7, which is the adoption of the Annual Progress Report, and this morning as well I presented the document in CRP 1, the Draft Annual Progress Report. I had opened the floor after having explained the nature of this document and the reasons I have drafted it the way it has been drafted in order to capture an overall balance. We then heard a series of speakers who expressed their views, and we also had the distinct sense this morning that there is a lot of commitment and desire to work towards a consensus outcome. We also heard this morning remarks from the Russian Federation as well as a group of states who made some comments with regard to the CRP, which indicates that there remains a gap before we can proceed to the adoption of the document in CRP 1. My friends, you will also recall that this morning I had posed a question to the Russian Federation as to whether they would be able to exercise flexibility, and they had asked to be given the opportunity to come back with a response in the afternoon. So here we are, and in order to have an open-ended and transparent discussion, it is my intention now to give the floor to the Russian Federation to ask them whether they wish to add any comments to what they had already expressed in the session this morning. Russian Federation, you have the floor, please. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, when it comes to the further organization of our work, Chairman, we will count on your experience and your wisdom. Chairman, the Russian delegation just received instructions from our capital, and I’m authorized to read the text of a declaration on the outcome of the Second Russia-Africa Summit on Cooperation to Ensure International Information Security. We, heads of state and government, the Russian Federation and African states, under the United Nations and representatives of the African Union, brought together on the 28th of July in St. Petersburg, Russia, to take part in the Second Russia-Africa Summit, confirm the decisions made during the first summit and the declaration of the first Africa-Russia summit. We are committed to continue to develop cooperation between the Russian Federation and African states in international information security. We note that the use of ICTs can directly affect political, economic, military, humanitarian, and other elements of international security and stability. We express our concern for the fact that ICTs could be used for purposes that are not in line with maintaining stability and international peace and security. We believe that it is necessary to prevent the use of ICTs to undermine the sovereignty or territorial integrity of a state through computer attacks on critical information infrastructure, as well as if it is used for terrorist or other criminal purposes. We place great importance on the issue of ensuring security when it comes to the transfer of ICTs, and we express our disagreement with the attempts by large companies and separate states to monopolize the ICT market, limiting certain states’ access to ICTs and expanding the digital divide. We note the responsibility of states to work within their national legislation on the use of ICTs to share reliable information on what might threaten international security and also to spread information on how to cooperate between nations and between populations. We note the following. The principles when it comes to personal data with all members of the United Nations will allow for greater security when it comes to trans-border transfers. We note the following. We confirm our common approach, that of African states and the Russian Federation, to ensuring security in the use of ICTs. We confirm that the use of ICTs to ensure international information security must be carried out in accordance with the principles of ensuring human rights and the universally accepted principles of international law, first and foremost enshrined in the UN Charter. We call for greater cooperation between states so as to prevent and peacefully settle conflicts and so as to mitigate the risk of mistaken actions that could take place with the misuse of ICTs. We note the key role of the United Nations in the further development of the norms, principles, and rules of responsible behavior of states in the use of ICTs, including in the creation of international legally binding instruments. And they’re being carried out by UN member states within the agreed-upon frameworks. We note the need under the UN to develop universal legally binding instruments on security and the use of ICTs and to ensure that information – cyber attacks are not carried out against private companies. We must expand our cooperation, cooperation between relevant bodies within various national organizations, including when it comes to responding to computer incidents or cyber incidents. We support international cooperation in ensuring ICT security by ramping up both bilateral and multilateral cooperation. We reiterate our commitment to continuing our joint work and coordination of efforts between Russia and African states under the auspices of the United Nations. We stress the importance of capacity building to combat this common threat in cyberspace, and we support the measures to strengthen cooperation and confidence between states. These measures must be aimed at the use of ICTs for peaceful purposes, strengthening the cyber sovereignty of developing countries. And this must take into account their needs and their requirements. We should facilitate transfers of experience and best practices, as well as technology, and we must assist in the training of qualified specialists. We confirm our commitment to multilateral cooperation in ensuring the security of ICTs and prevention of this technology coming into the hands of terrorists and other extremists. Under the United Nations auspices, we call for the development of a universal international convention on the prevention of the use of ICTs for criminal purposes. We note the need to bolster coordination between the Russian Federation and African states and international organizations under the UN system when it comes to both postal services and the ITU, in particular when it comes to developing documents to develop ICTs. We are guided by the fact that the Tunis Program for Information Society should be developed. It was adopted in 2015 at the global high-level meeting on the Information Society. We support the creation of a balanced international system to manage the internet under the auspices of the United Nations, so as to avoid any unilateral political limitations or commercial interests affecting this internet, and to ensure the safety and stability of the critical infrastructure of our World Wide Web. To further deepen our cooperation, Russia and African states have agreed to carry out regional meetings between Russia and Africa on security of and in the use of information and communications technologies. This will lay the foundation for practical cooperation between the interested bodies in our countries. The Russian Federation, Chair, will expect that this statement will be included in the annals of the work of the Open-Ended Working Group.

Thank you, Russian Federation, for your statement. Friends, we are under agenda item 7, which is the adoption of annual progress reports. And it’s Friday afternoon, and we need to make progress and bring our work to conclusion. I listened very carefully to the statement made by the representative of the Russian Federation. And I note, Russia, that you remain committed to consensus or producing a consensus outcome. You have some flexibility, but you also have some concerns. I’m paraphrasing. This is my understanding of the preface of your statement. You also described the content of the Russia-Africa statement, but I view that as separate from our immediate discussion at this point. And I take note of that statement. Now, I’d like to get back to this question of the adoption of annual progress reports. And this morning, the proposals for amendments were put by a group of countries. And I want to ask whether anyone else, with regard to those who have made amendments, wishes to take the floor at this point. Belarus, you’re asking for the floor.

Thank you so much, Distinguished Chair. Firstly, I’d like to congratulate you on the perfect job you’re performing now with your team. That’s a very difficult one. I’ll just make a short briefing statement. The global discussion on international security becomes ever more important, and this session is proof of it with its contradictions and different views. We reiterate our commitment to the universalization of existing international legal instruments that regulate this topic, namely ICTs. However, the real picture of our discussion here shows that there are serious differences in views between countries, and I think we’ve all seen this today. Unfortunately, some of the provisions in the draft document we are discussing today go beyond the mandate of the Open-Ended Working Group, in our view, when it comes to resolution 75/240. We are of the view that delicate issues are being discussed only within a limited group and a limited format, but a broader format is only seen in certain stages. Nevertheless, Belarus focuses on the need to include the positions of all states, including the joint statements of groups of states that were made on the 27th of July 2023, which we joined, as well as the legal regulations to avoid any grey zones. We support this being included in the resolution.

Thank you. Thank you, Belarus. I see no further requests for the floor. There were three states who had wanted to speak from the discussion this morning, and I’d like to ask them whether at this point they can hold their statement in abeyance. I will give them an opportunity later in the discussion because I think it’s really important that we get to the task of the question of adoption, and now is not the time for a general statement. So, would the three remaining speakers wish to take the floor? Well, as you can see, Ireland, Jordan, and Vietnam. So, let’s hear from them so that I’m being fair and exhaustive to all those who have asked for the floor. Ireland, you have the floor.

Chair, I think I’m happy for you to continue on with your work and to skip my statement at this time.

Thank you very much, Ireland, for your understanding. Jordan, please, your button is pressed.

I also would like to skip my statement for the sake of having consensus and further discussions.

Thank you so much, Jordan, as well as to Vietnam for your understanding. Much as I would like to hear all your statements, I think we are at a phase in the work of our committee where we need to resolve the gap that we are facing with regard to the adoption of the report. France, having heard the statement this afternoon, and also based on the informal consultations and contacts I’ve had and my team has had, it is my sense that there is a strong commitment to consensus and that an outcome is within grasp. As Chair, I remain very much committed to protecting the integrity of the draft annual progress report in CRP 1 and to preserving the overall balance and the very fragile balance of positions captured therein. Now, in order to proceed with the adoption, it is my sense at this point that it would be useful to adjourn the meeting for me to continue to have some informal consultations, and I therefore propose that for the next hour I will be here in the room. We are not adjourning to another meeting room. We will be here, and I intend to reach out and talk to different delegations with a view of getting to adoption. And it’s my determination and hope to close the meeting by 6 p.m. So on that note, the meeting is now adjourned. Please remain where you are so that I and my team can reach out to different delegations to have some conversations that hopefully will get us to adoption soon. The meeting is now adjourned for an hour. I thank you. Thank you. Distinguished delegates, we are resuming the 10th meeting of the fifth substantive session of the Open-Ended Working Group on Security of and in the Use of ICT at this point. We will continue our consideration of Agenda Item 7, Adoption of the Second Annual Progress Report. Distinguished delegates, before we suspended, I had informed all delegations that I was going to undertake informal consultations with a view to ensuring and facilitating the adoption of the draft Second Annual Progress Report as contained in Document CRP-1. I’d like to report to you that I had very fruitful and productive conversations with a range of representatives from delegations as well as groups of delegations. It was clear to me that there was a very strong commitment to achieving an outcome by consensus, and there was also a commitment to preserving the overall balance as contained in Document CRP-1. In order to address some of the concerns and issues expressed at the formal meeting of the Working Group this morning, during which some additional proposals were put forward, I undertook consultations informally as to how best we can address those issues raised in our Working Group. After many rounds of back-and-forth of informal consultations with several interested delegations, I’m now in a position to put forward a suggestion that I hope will enable us to move forward and move towards the formal adoption of the draft Annual Progress Report contained in Document CRP-1. The solution that I intend to put forward will preserve, in my view, the integrity of the text as contained in CRP-1, and it will also preserve the overall balance that has been carefully drafted and captured in CRP-1. The proposal that I wish to put forward for the consideration of this Working Group would comprise a technical adjustment in the form of inserting two footnotes to the document contained in CRP-1. The first footnote applies to paragraph 32 of the document in CRP-1. This paragraph reads as follows: Noted the possibility of future elaboration of additional binding obligations, states discuss the need to consider whether any gaps exist in how existing international law applies in the use of ICTs, and further consider the development of additional legally binding obligations. At the end of this paragraph, we will insert a footnote, which will be reflected as footnote number 30. And at the bottom of the page, footnote number 30 will contain the following text, and I quote, A proposal was made in this regard as reflected in Annex D. This is the first footnote. There will be a second footnote inserted in paragraph 58. Paragraph 58 reads as follows, and I quote, States, at the 6th, 7th, and 8th sessions of the OEWG, as well as in two dedicated intersessional meetings, to continue to engage in focused discussions within the framework of the OEWG to further discuss proposals on regular institutional dialogue, including the POA, full stop. At these sessions, states will also engage in focused discussions, comma, on the relationship between the POA and the OEWG, comma, and on the scope, comma, content and structure of a POA. The UN Secretariat is also requested to brief the OEWG at its 6th session on the report of the Secretary General submitted to the General Assembly at its 78th session. At the end of this sentence, we will insert a footnote which will be indicated as footnote number 40. And because of the insertion of the earlier footnote, the numbering of subsequent footnotes in the text will have to be adjusted accordingly. And therefore, the footnote that is now being inserted in paragraph 58 is footnote number 40. And at the bottom of the page, footnote number 40 will have the following reference, A/78/76. Delegates, these are the two technical adjustments that I had put forward in the course of my informal consultations to various interested delegations and concerned delegations. As a basis to move forward with the adoption of the document contained in CRP 1. It is my sense that with the insertion of these two footnotes, document contained in CRP 1, the draft annual progress report would be acceptable for members of the working group. And on the basis of these technical adjustments, it is now my intention to put it to the working group that we proceed to adopt the draft annual progress report as the outcome of our deliberations this week. It is also my intention not to open the floor for any interventions at this point, but I will allow for statements and explanations of positions after the adoption of the draft annual progress report. And during that period, you will have the opportunity to make statements and explanations of positions. So may I now ask the working group whether we can proceed to adopt the draft annual progress report as contained in document. A/292/2023/CRP 1 as orally revised and to include it in the report of the working group. I see no objection. It is so decided. Thank you. Distinguished delegates, thank you very much for your expression of appreciation. I wanted to draw your attention to the fact that we have interpretation only until a quarter past six, and I want to thank the interpreters for allowing us to stay a little longer. But I’d like to assure you that we can continue our work in informal mode and without interpretation. But before I open the floor to take statements and explanation of positions, it will be remiss of me if I do not at the outset express my deep appreciation to all of you in this working group for the very constructive manner that you have engaged in and participated in the work of this working group throughout this week, but also throughout the last. 12 months and even prior to that, in the course of the various informal consultations that I had to undertake as part of our discussions to bring the adoption forward. We had heard a number of proposals being made and I had engaged in various delegations and I wanted to thank the contributions of all the delegations who were engaged in informal consultations. And I know that this morning that many of you had indicated that your specific proposals were not addressed. But I wanted to say also that even if your proposals have not been addressed, whether it is the proposal that was put forward by Kenya, whether it was put forward by the Islamic Republic of Iran, or whether it was put forward by groups of delegations. I want to say that all of you have been very constructive, all of you have been very positive, and I wanted to express my gratitude for the role that all of you have played that has led us to the adoption of this second annual progress report. I think it is a very significant achievement for the working group and all of you can be justifiably be proud of having made this step forward. Now, given the time constraint, I do not wish to make any longer statement, but I would like to now open the floor for statements and explanation of position. And I would like delegations to press the button now so that I have a sense of how many delegations wish to make explanations of positions. I would also like to draw your attention to the fact that all of you have the option of submitting your statements and explanation of positions in writing to the Secretariat and all explanations of positions will be captured in a compendium and circulated as an official document of the working group. I am, of course, prepared to stay here for as long as possible to listen to your explanation of positions, but you do have the option of submitting your explanation of positions in writing. Now, distinguished delegates, I have also been advised by the Secretariat that it is important for the working group to adopt the procedural report of the OEWG while we still have interpretation. So I’d like to also make sure that we complete that formality before we take statements and explanation of positions. So it is now my intention to move to the consideration of the draft procedural report of the OEWG as contained in document A/AC.292/2023/L.1. Thank you. I think the document is self-explanatory. It has an introduction and it has a section on opening and duration of the session. It describes the attendance. It describes in Section C the officers who are elected, the organization of work, documentation, proceedings of the working group, which describes the date of the meetings of this working group. And it concludes with a section where it says that this procedural report has been adopted. May I take it that it is the wish of the working group to adopt the draft report as contained in document A/AC.292/2023/L.1 and authorize the Chair to finalize the report? I see no objections. It is so decided. We will now take statements and explanation of positions and I give the floor now to the Russian Federation.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have the honor of sharing a statement clarifying the position on behalf of a group of states, namely Belarus, Burundi, China, Cuba, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Iran, Nicaragua, the Russian Federation, the Republic of Sudan, Syria, and Venezuela. We would like to express our appreciation for the effort put by Your Excellency and your team into developing the Annual Progress Report and facilitating its consensual adoption. While supporting consensus on the document in the spirit of goodwill and compromise, we acknowledge the presence of significant flaws that are of deep concern to our delegations. Firstly, the APR is to a large extent devoted to the implementation of rules, norms, and principles of responsible behavior of states in the use of ICTs, while almost ignoring the priority task to further develop these norms. It is concerning that references to the latter have not been added, but removed from some paragraphs. This clearly contradicts the mandate of the OEWG as enshrined in the UNGA Resolution 75-240 and supported by consensus of all states in the UNGA Resolution 76-19. Furthermore, we note that the APR – I’m sorry – we have been strong advocates of this democratic era and consensus-building process of the OEWG on ICTs in which every member state must be treated on equal standing. Moreover, we are disappointed by the inclusion of language on human rights, international humanitarian law, as well as the overemphasis on gender issues, despite clear disagreement of like-minded delegations. Such contentious topics should not have been incorporated without achieving consensus. Therefore, we do vehemently reserve the right to interpret or reject those provisions that contradict our national fundamental principles, policies, laws, regulations, and values. The role of other interested parties in ensuring information security should not be overestimated. The OEWG is an intergovernmental process in which negotiation and decision-making are exclusively prerogatives of the member states. We stress that only accredited representatives of business, NGOs, and academia, including legal experts, have the right to participate in the activities of the OEWG. We once again stress the urgency to resolve the visa issue for all national delegations and accredited non-governmental entities in a full and timely manner, adhering to the legally binding obligations of the host country. As the OEWG approaches its conclusion, it is of utmost importance to prioritize achieving greater consensus. It is disheartening to witness our perspectives and concrete proposals not receiving the attention they deserve and being affected by a new political agenda. Eradicating such a situation is not just essential for this specific process, but also paramount for the efficiency of any future processes. We kindly ask the chair to include the current statement as well as the statements of this group of states in the compendium of statements on the APR and make them available at relevant portals and websites. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And separately, the Russian delegation would like to take the floor for a national statement. Thank you.

Thank you, Russian Federation. Please proceed with your national statement.

Chairman, we would ask for the floor a bit later, if that is possible.

Sure, Russian Federation. I have the following four delegations which have asked for the floor: Canada, Costa Rica, Greece, and Australia. It is my hope that we can wrap up our meeting sooner rather than later, but I am at the disposal of members of the Working Group to be here as long as needed to listen to your statements. Please keep in mind that interpretation will end at 6:15. So we go now to Canada, to be followed by Costa Rica. Thank you.

Mr. Chair, Canada thanks you for your tireless work and that of your team and of the Secretariat in bringing us to consensus. My delegation came into this room this morning in a genuine spirit of compromise, confidence building, and consensus. Canada was not fully happy with the text. There was much we wanted to see changed, but we also respect the views of others and understood the need for balance. We are pleased that we’ve reached consensus on what remains a substantive, action-oriented report. We are convinced that this will allow us to advance our work in the coming year. However, Mr. Chair, Canada is deeply concerned that today we were no longer in the space of consensus as it was intended within the multilateral system. The consensus of finding the best possible option to make everyone a little unhappy. The consensus where we hold our noses and accept the best interest of the group as a whole. We are tipping dangerously towards a form of consensus that has deadlocked other UN bodies for years. This is consensus as a veto, consensus as a bullying tactic. This is a very dangerous slope that benefits no one as it risks blocking all progress in addressing ICTs in the context of international peace and security within the UN. We hope this trend will not continue over the coming year. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Canada, for your statement. Costa Rica, followed by Canada.

In which language may I address you? Thank you. Costa Rica welcomes the outcome of this process and the report that represents a hard-won consensus and a reflection of the various points of view that has been adopted. We are encouraged that we’ve been able to present a consensual report that reflects our collective efforts to date and that recommends the following steps for action. A report that contains important steps forward, such as the revision of gender-sensitive language in paragraph 43A, and that highlights the importance of integrating a gender perspective in all discussions and ensures inclusivity and representation in the cybernetic sphere. Progress such as the affirmation of debating crucial topics such as human rights, actively supported by Costa Rica. Steps such as language on possible future mechanisms for inter-institutional dialogue described as being open, inclusive, and transparent, and that will allow the participation of interested parties that are non-governmental bodies and other parties, as well as provision for a greater commitment through specific meetings in between sessions. All of these are steps in the right direction. At the present juncture, the negative impacts of the behavior of states in cyberspace are more worrying than ever. The direct experience of Costa Rica with ransomware has highlighted that cybernetic threats go beyond mere criminal police concerns and they affect the states, our state functions, as well as specific individuals. When the President handed over the baton to us, it was our responsibility to take it and carry on this significant work. Costa Rica is pleased that we have not given up on this and that we have continued to stand committed to pursuing collective solutions and fostering a more secure and peaceful cyberspace. I thank you.

Thank you very much, Costa Rica, and thank you, Ambassador Maritsa Chan, for your presence and for your statement. I give the floor now to Greece, to be followed by Australia.

Thank you, Chair, for giving me the floor. First and foremost, we would like to express our deepest gratitude to you and your team for all your efforts striving to produce a consensus report. Even though the report is far from perfect, as other delegations have mentioned, it progresses our work referencing concrete future activities such as the PoA and the Program of Action. Greece, once again in the interest of consensus, expressed flexibility and supported the final APR. I must, however, express our disappointment, considering that this morning around 185 Member States were open to compromise in the interest of consensus, and they became hostages of a small group of countries and of what will come to be known as footnote diplomacy. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I wish you and all other delegates a well-deserved summit.

Thank you, Greece. Australia, to be followed by Cuba.

Thank you very much, Chair. I want to join in the expressions of gratitude to you and your team for getting us through this week to adopt a consensus report. Australia will take you up on your offer to submit in writing a full explanation of position, but in the interests of time, I want to extract only one point from that statement. Australia welcomes the report’s recognition of the high level of participation by women delegates and the prominence of gender perspectives in our discussions. I’m delighted to report that at the session this week, 48% of interventions were made by women, and we had even higher numbers of women participating in interventions on norms and international law at 51%, and 54% of interventions made on confidence-building measures and capacity building were made by women. This is a huge improvement compared to our online May intersessional, where only 27.5% of statements were made by women delegates, but hearteningly, it is similar to our statistics in our in-person sessions over the last year, where we had 47% of all interventions made by women in July and 48% in March. In this regard, Australia recognizes in particular the contributions of the Women in Cyber Fellows. Your participation enriches our discussions and improves our joint outcome, and I hope despite the significant journey that we have been on today, you can all join us for a group photo with the fellows at the close of our session. Thank you all again. I wish everyone here, but especially the Chair and the Chair’s team and the Secretariat, a full night’s sleep. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Australia, for underlining the virtues of a full night’s sleep. I now give the floor to the last speaker who has asked for the floor, Cuba.

Chairman, we are grateful for your intense efforts and those of your team to approve the second annual progress report of the Open-Ended Working Group on security of and in the use of information and communication technologies. We firmly believe in the value of the Working Group as the only forum that enables the participation of all states to discuss transparently and in equal conditions on the security of and the use of ICTs. For this reason, our delegation has given priority to consensus on the report adopted, even though we had greater expectations specifically as regards progressing with the development of additional norms for responsible behavior of states in the area of security and in the use of information and communication technologies. We hope that future sessions of the Working Group will see progress in this endeavor in compliance with the mandate of the Working Group. We will continue to work towards the drafting of an international instrument that is legally binding and broad on ICTs in the context of international security. Unlike voluntary norms for implementation by states, a legally binding document would establish obligations to definitively address the growing threats and challenges in this area. This would also allow us to respond to the legal gaps that currently persist. We highlight the vital need for the proliferation of language from groups of governmental experts with limited composition, especially as regards the topics that do not enjoy international consensus, such as relating to the notion of the automatic applicability of international law in the sphere of information and communication technologies, including international humanitarian law. In order to address the threats that come from misuse of ICTs in the context of international security, it is essential that we all cooperate, all states work hand in hand to build capacity together. We are pleased that the report includes a number of initiatives in this direction. Nevertheless, we hope that the language in relation to this can be strengthened in future sessions of the Working Group in relation to all areas of the Group’s mandate in order to eliminate the digital divide that so dramatically affects developing countries. We look forward to future discussions on periodic institutional dialogue under the auspices of the United Nations as recommended by the report, as it has been adopted without prejudice to the outcome, without placing the Program of Action above any national actions. This mechanism should be intergovernmental and based on consensus decision-making. We reiterate that Cuba is committed to the Open-Ended Working Group and will be available to contribute to building consensus on the areas covered by its mandate. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Cuba, for your statement. Distinguished delegates, before we lose our interpreters who will have to leave at 6:15, I want to take this opportunity to express my gratitude to them. They have often been ready to go beyond the normal allocated times, they’ve been very flexible, and they have been excellent in trying to keep up with the rapid clip and pace of your interventions and in interpreting what is a very technical subject, so our gratitude to the interpreters. Please give them a round of applause. I also want to, while we are on the subject of expressing our gratitude, express my appreciation to the team at the podium, from the Secretariat: Sonia Elliott, Katia Widjiat-Moko, Dino D’Albasto, Gerard Giangeli from the DGACM team, as well as Catherine Priceman and Virginia Browning here, both of them and Sonia are here. Please also give them a round of applause. And while I’m on the subject too, I would like to express my gratitude to my own team: Councillor Clarice Lim, who is behind me—Clarice, please rise—and First Secretary Matthew Wong, I think you know him, he’s the energetic young man who goes by without much sleep, and my advisor Dr. Gillian Goh, you know her very well, she’s a walking encyclopedia on all things ICT-related, so my gratitude to them. Please show them also. So we’ll now continue with one more speaker, Russian Federation. I hope you still have a little bit more of interpretation time. You have the floor, please.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you and your team for the work that you have done. It has allowed us today to adopt the Annual Progress Report of the Open-Ended Working Group. I wish to stress that Russia did so with a heavy heart. Despite the achievement of a full range of important agreements, including about the implementation of an originally Russian initiative on a global points of contact registry, we are concerned by the attempts to selectively interpret the Open-Ended Working Group’s mandate in favor of the implementation of the rules, norms, and of responsible behavior to the detriment of the development of new norms. Russia will decisively demand a balanced approach to the work of the Open-Ended Working Group and will not allow for our common process to be focused on the interests of a narrow group of states. The Russian Federation will also call for, in the outcome document of the Open-Ended Working Group, the inclusion of elements that were included in the declaration of the second Russia-Africa summit. The Russian Federation does not consider itself to be bound by these obligations, even voluntarily, those that we included in the AAPR today, specifically those provisions that run counter to our interests and our national legislation. Mr. Chairman, I would ask you to disseminate this Russian statement along with the report. Thank you.

Thank you, Russian Federation, for your statement. Islamic Republic of Iran, you have the floor, please.

Mr. Chair, at the outset, I would like to join other colleagues in expressing our delegation’s sincere gratitude to you, your team, the Secretariat, and all delegates for all contributions extended to this multilateral, inclusive, unique, democratic, and historical process on security and in the use of ICTs. We appreciate, Mr. Chair, your acknowledgment of our proposals and hope that in future sessions of the OEWG, a proper approach will be led by you, Mr. Chair, to accommodate all proposals, including ours, equally. In accordance with the founding resolution 75-240, the working method of the group is consensus, and this never entails disregarding the views of even a single Member State. This is the meaning of consensus and must be preserved and promoted. Our distinguished Chair rightly believes that the OEWG itself is a confidence-building measure, and we agree with that. However, if the concerns and interests of all Member States are not considered, such needed confidence and trust, as one of the valuable features of the OEWG, would gradually be diminished. To avoid such a situation, we reiterate the necessity of beginning negotiations based on the rolling text, paragraph-by-paragraph negotiations, exploring different avenues of informal diplomacy, and launching fruitful dialogue to cover the gaps and discuss the differences, all under the direction of the esteemed Chair. Last but not least, in light of the latest version of the annual report, we align ourselves with the statement delivered by Russia on behalf of the like-minded group, and furthermore, we are obliged to disassociate ourselves from any of its provisions that are not consistent with our national policy, laws, and regulations, as well as our national values and priorities.

Thank you very much, Islamic Republic of Iran. I have no further requests for the floor. And once again, I’d like to assure you that all statements in explanation of positions can be submitted to the Secretariat, and they will be compiled and circulated as an official document of the Working Group. It seems that I am required to make some closing remarks. I’m not sure what I should say, but just to make the point that I do note that a lot of you who have been engaged in this process, and you have been engaged in a very constructive, positive, and energetic way, also have your own sense of disappointment and frustration because perhaps not all your positions were reflected as you had wished, or perhaps because you thought that the responses to your proposals were not as positive as you thought your proposals deserved. And perhaps this too has been a source of frustration for you, but I wanted to tell you that sitting from the podium here, I greatly admire how each one of you, representing your own delegations, have engaged and participated with such professionalism, such dedication, and such commitment, that I really want to express my deepest gratitude to all of you. I think that around the midway point of this process, I should say that I’ve come to know many of you personally, and I know that this process is also in some ways an ecosystem of personalities, a family in some ways, each one of you making your own contribution. The journey can be frustrating, but what is important is that today we have made a second step forward. That is the result of your engagement and your contribution. You can be very proud of that. And I hope that people in your capital will also recognize the contributions that you have made. Now, as a result of this second step that we have made today, we have a very substantive agenda or action-oriented program that we have to carry forward to the next year. We have a roadmap for action, and this will also require your continued commitment and engagement in terms of carrying out what needs to be done. Now, a consensus process is not easy, and it will lead to frustrations, disappointment, and different working methods, different styles. Some of you have expressed your frustration through different terms, and footnotes are a part of diplomacy, footwork is a part of diplomacy, and food and drinks are also a part of diplomacy. All of that contributes to creating confidence, building trust, and building relationships. In that sense, what you have done today by adopting this progress report by consensus is that you have strengthened the foundation for the work of the United Nations, strengthened the foundation for what we are trying to do for our countries, for our nations, and for our people. And there’s a lot more work that needs to be done. I intend to give some careful thought in terms of how we can organize our work next year. There is going to be a series of meetings and intersessionals that has now been mandated, and I’ll see how best we can organize that. And I will in due course share and communicate with you in terms of how the meetings can be organized. The last thing I would say is that, as was the case last year, the report of the Working Group will go to the First Committee. And it is my intention to put forward a draft resolution in my capacity as chair and presented by Singapore in the First Committee to enable the report of the Working Group to be adopted by consensus. And I hope and I ask you and appeal to you to facilitate the adoption by consensus in the First Committee of the report of this Working Group, which we have now adopted by consensus. And I hope that the spirit of consensus that has prevailed today will be transmitted into the work of the Working Group so that the enabling resolution that is adopted in the First Committee to endorse the annual progress report will also be adopted by consensus. So, distinguished delegates, friends, those are the final remarks that I wanted to share with you. I know it’s Friday evening. I think I should release you. You deserve a break. And I would like to once again thank all of you, and I wish you a pleasant evening. The meeting is adjourned. Thank you.